Mirror problem

Nathanael D. Noblet nathanael at gnat.ca
Thu Mar 2 10:40:22 UTC 2006


On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 08:38 +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:

> Problem I see: who will decide which versions are working correctly 
> together and what is "stable"? Who will test all these on each and every 
> arch? See how long the automated builds take only for uclibc on each 
> arch (build logs posted each day).

People using them... I mean the lure of buildroot for me is a *highly*
flexible build system. Plus quite easy to learn and use. I picked it up
and added all sorts of packages (some which were added to buildroot).
Built root filesystems and used in products that are installed. Now if I
had a way to save the config file (which I can) AND the version/options
for each package. I could maintain multiple "installation" filesystems.
Right now if I update all of a sudden one package may not work with
another. Keeps things small and simple.

> Anyone here proposing to set up a box that does the test runs for each 
> stable-declared version of buildroot combination?

I was thinking of more of a submission process where the conf directory
is organized somehow, (first level off the top of my head is arch). Then
the buildroot menu allowing one to see the packages included and their
versions by enabling a particular config...

> I think it's better using gentoo for this (I know not all like it, but 
> if you adventure already to build everything w/ buildroot, then gentoo 
> does it better for you): uClibc is fully supported, supports 
> stable/testing/experimental, it has cross-compiling support, it allows 
> switching between binutils/gcc versions easily (even the cross-compiler 
> ones), it can be installed into a chroot, so you could stay w/ your 
> preferred distro natively.

I guess, but then who need buildroot at all then?





More information about the uClibc mailing list